I was at school when Hollywood released those huge epics in the 50s and 60s to halt our hypnotic attraction to TV, and herd us back into the cinemas.
I loved them, now they are nostalgic, guilty pleasures, but I was imprinted with them like future generations would be with "Star Wars" or "Marvel Movies".
I saw them all starting with "Demetrius and the Gladiators" then "The Vikings", "Ben Hur", "Spartacus", "King of Kings", right up to "Cleopatra" and "The fall of the Roman Empire", which went an asp and a toga too far, and blew money no imperial tax collector could ever recoup. It was over.
In 1961 came "El Cid" Even today it has power. "Game of Thrones" and historical mini-series have replaced those movies, but none have out-chiselled and out-dimpled Charlton and Kirk.
The story of Spain's greatest hero is complex 11th Century history; it's Christians vs Muslims, but there were tricky alliances and treachery all round. Rising above it all, Charlton Heston as El Cid, looked powerful wielding "Tizona", his two-handed sword.
You have to admire the screenwriters that carved out the screenplay. Eventually they just thought "The Cid" is our guy and we'll just make him sort of a superhero that can take down 13 dudes single-handed and get him interacting with Sophia Loren's Chimene, the hottest bodice on the Iberian Peninsular. Throw in a crashing joust, flags, castles, a battle and a memorable ending and we've got a movie.
Every scene is beautifully composed. Not all filmmakers could deal with widescreen, but Anthony Mann and his cinematographer sure could.
Visually, the horizontals were mostly below the halfway mark: crowds, hills, buildings, a floor or a deep shadow. Above that tower the verticals; columns and archways, trees, or the sky simply dominating the top half. You could just about place a picture frame around any image from "El Cid".
Which actors could stand out against that? Heston and Loren were perfect. With larger-than-life features, wide cheekbones, Heston's shoulders and Sophia's almond eyes and full lips, they seem sculptural when they clinch. As time passes, Charlton sports a grey-flecked beard and a designer scar; it adds to the effect.
The dialogue sounds important, but there isn't a light touch anywhere. Look at what Ustinov did for "Spartacus" or Hugh Griffith did for "Ben Hur". They had the guy, Frank Thring playing an Emir, but they didn't cut him loose. He could chew scenery even Charles Laughton couldn't digest. Remember his Herod in "King of Kings"? "Dance for me Salome".
Then there is Miklos Rozsa's score; his music drives the action. He created a rich sound incorporating Spanish music. It's symphonic movie magic that was soon to depart Hollywood, until John Williams showed how much we missed it with his music for "Star Wars".
The film reminds me of those paintings of classic historical scenes that usually take up the whole wall of an art gallery. You are just amazed at the technical mastery in the detail, the backgrounds and the beautifully rendered figures in the foreground. Too massive to ignore, like them, "El Cid" has a magnificent, monumental quality.
I loved them, now they are nostalgic, guilty pleasures, but I was imprinted with them like future generations would be with "Star Wars" or "Marvel Movies".
I saw them all starting with "Demetrius and the Gladiators" then "The Vikings", "Ben Hur", "Spartacus", "King of Kings", right up to "Cleopatra" and "The fall of the Roman Empire", which went an asp and a toga too far, and blew money no imperial tax collector could ever recoup. It was over.
In 1961 came "El Cid" Even today it has power. "Game of Thrones" and historical mini-series have replaced those movies, but none have out-chiselled and out-dimpled Charlton and Kirk.
The story of Spain's greatest hero is complex 11th Century history; it's Christians vs Muslims, but there were tricky alliances and treachery all round. Rising above it all, Charlton Heston as El Cid, looked powerful wielding "Tizona", his two-handed sword.
You have to admire the screenwriters that carved out the screenplay. Eventually they just thought "The Cid" is our guy and we'll just make him sort of a superhero that can take down 13 dudes single-handed and get him interacting with Sophia Loren's Chimene, the hottest bodice on the Iberian Peninsular. Throw in a crashing joust, flags, castles, a battle and a memorable ending and we've got a movie.
Every scene is beautifully composed. Not all filmmakers could deal with widescreen, but Anthony Mann and his cinematographer sure could.
Visually, the horizontals were mostly below the halfway mark: crowds, hills, buildings, a floor or a deep shadow. Above that tower the verticals; columns and archways, trees, or the sky simply dominating the top half. You could just about place a picture frame around any image from "El Cid".
Which actors could stand out against that? Heston and Loren were perfect. With larger-than-life features, wide cheekbones, Heston's shoulders and Sophia's almond eyes and full lips, they seem sculptural when they clinch. As time passes, Charlton sports a grey-flecked beard and a designer scar; it adds to the effect.
The dialogue sounds important, but there isn't a light touch anywhere. Look at what Ustinov did for "Spartacus" or Hugh Griffith did for "Ben Hur". They had the guy, Frank Thring playing an Emir, but they didn't cut him loose. He could chew scenery even Charles Laughton couldn't digest. Remember his Herod in "King of Kings"? "Dance for me Salome".
Then there is Miklos Rozsa's score; his music drives the action. He created a rich sound incorporating Spanish music. It's symphonic movie magic that was soon to depart Hollywood, until John Williams showed how much we missed it with his music for "Star Wars".
The film reminds me of those paintings of classic historical scenes that usually take up the whole wall of an art gallery. You are just amazed at the technical mastery in the detail, the backgrounds and the beautifully rendered figures in the foreground. Too massive to ignore, like them, "El Cid" has a magnificent, monumental quality.